beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The plaintiff was sentenced to the court below's decision that "B and C jointly pay to the plaintiff 520,264,561 won per annum from August 3, 2003 to May 2, 2006 and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment" (the above winning amount was recognized by the appellate court, and the final appeal became final and conclusive on December 12, 2007) in the lawsuit for construction cost payment that the plaintiff is the defendant, the school juristic person Eul as the defendant and the defendant Eul as the defendant, and the school juristic person Eul as the defendant, and the defendant Eul as the defendant."
B. On June 29, 2007, the Plaintiff filed an application against B and C for the determination of the amount of litigation costs (the District Court Decision 2007Kacal50), and on June 29, 2007, the said court decided that “In the case of construction cost payment between the above parties (Seoul High Court Decision 2003Da6443 (Seoul High Court Decision 2005Na8141, Supreme Court Decision 2006Da33616), the amount of litigation costs that B and C shall reimburse to the Plaintiff is KRW 14,205,375, respectively.”
C. Meanwhile, among the liquidation procedures against the school juristic person B, at the liquidators' meeting held on December 29, 2004, the court of first instance declared as follows: "The construction company, H, I, and J, 203 Gohap643 case number of 2003 Gohap6443 case number, which was sentenced on December 17, 2004, paid 560,891,149 won to the Sejong Housing Construction Co., Ltd. for the school juristic person," which was held on December 29, 2004. (Attachment 3 decision) This amount is to be changed depending on the judgment of the appellate court, or in the case of the provisional execution against the plaintiff, it is anticipated that the pertinent amount will be required according to the legal procedure in the case of the provisional execution against the plaintiff."
In the above liquidators' meeting, "the amount of the judgment of the first instance court in the case of 2003 Gohap6443 is the defendant's responsibility."